↓ Skip to main content

Scaling up early infant diagnosis of HIV in Rwanda, 2008–2010

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Public Health Policy, November 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (88th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (84th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
14 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
25 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
114 Mendeley
Title
Scaling up early infant diagnosis of HIV in Rwanda, 2008–2010
Published in
Journal of Public Health Policy, November 2012
DOI 10.1057/jphp.2012.62
Pubmed ID
Authors

Agnes Binagwaho, Placidie Mugwaneza, Ange Anitha Irakoze, Sabin Nsanzimana, Mawuena Agbonyitor, Cameron T Nutt, Claire M Wagner, Alphonse Rukundo, Anita Ahayo, Peter Drobac, Corine Karema, Ruton Hinda, Lucinda Leung, Sachini Bandara, Elena Chopyak, Mary C Smith Fawzi

Abstract

More than 390,000 children are newly infected with HIV each year, only 28 per cent of whom benefit from early infant diagnosis (EID). Rwanda's Ministry of Health identified several major challenges hindering EID scale-up in care of HIV-positive infants. It found poor counseling and follow-up by caregivers of HIV-exposed infants, lack of coordination with maternal and child health-care programs, and long delays between the collection of samples and return of results to the health facility and caregiver. By increasing geographic access, integrating EID with vaccination programs, and investing in a robust mobile phone reporting system, Rwanda increased population coverage of EID from approximately 28 to 72.4 per cent (and to 90.3 per cent within the prevention of mother to child transmission program) between 2008 and 2011. Turnaround time from sample collection to receipt of results at the originating health facility was reduced from 144 to 20 days. Rwanda rapidly scaled up and improved its EID program, but challenges persist for linking infected infants to care.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 14 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 114 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Rwanda 1 <1%
Kenya 1 <1%
Unknown 112 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 26 23%
Student > Master 24 21%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 7%
Lecturer 7 6%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 5%
Other 18 16%
Unknown 25 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 38 33%
Social Sciences 16 14%
Nursing and Health Professions 11 10%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 4%
Business, Management and Accounting 4 4%
Other 13 11%
Unknown 28 25%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 27 December 2012.
All research outputs
#3,278,190
of 24,007,780 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Public Health Policy
#158
of 812 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#32,523
of 284,188 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Public Health Policy
#3
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,007,780 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 86th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 812 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 284,188 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 13 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.